Complaint

Case 3:17-cv-01736-MMA-MDD Document 1 Filed 08/28/17 PageID.
1 Page 1 of 17
1 John W. Davis (CA Bar No. 200113)

LAW OFFICE OF JOHN W. DAVIS
2
501 W. Broadway, Suite 800
3 San Diego, CA 92101
4
Telephone: (619) 400-4870
Facsimile: (619) 342-7170
5 Email: john@johnwdavis.com
6
Charles M. Thompson (Applying for Admission Pro Hac Vice)
7 1401 Doug Baker Blvd., Suite 107-135
8
Birmingham, AL 35242
Telephone (205) 995-0068
9 Facsimile: (866) 610-1650
10 Email: cmtlaw@aol.com
11 Attorneys for Plaintiff
12
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14
15
JANELL JOHNSON '17CV1736 MMA MDD
Civ. Action No. ____________________
16
CAMPBELL, individually, and
CLASS ACTION
17 on behalf of all others similarly
situated, COMPLAINT FOR PERMANENT
18
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, RESTITUTION,
19 Plaintiff, AND DAMAGES FOR VIOLATION OF
20 CAL. BUS. AND PROF. CODE 17200, ET
v. SEQ., AND BUS. AND PROF. CODE
21 17500, ET SEQ., FOR NEGLIGENT
22 MISPRESENTATION AND
ANNIES HOMEGROWN, INC. INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION,
23 and FOR BREACH OF EXPRESS AND
24
GENERAL MILLS, INC., IMPLIED WARRANTIES, AND FOR
VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIAS
25 CONSUMER LEGAL REMEDIES ACT,
26
Defendants. CIVIL CODE 1750, ET SEQ.
27 Jury Trial Requested
28
Complaint for Injunctive Relief and Damages

Case 3:17-cv-01736-MMA-MDD Document 1 Filed 08/28/17 PageID.2 Page 2 of 17
1 Plaintiff, Janell Johnson Campbell, by and through her attorneys, alleges upon
2 personal knowledge as to her, and as to all other matters upon information and belief
3
based upon, inter alia, the investigation made by her attorneys, as follows:
4
I. PARTIES
5
1. Plaintiff Janell Johnson Campbell is, and at all relevant times
6
7 mentioned in this Complaint, was a resident of Hoover, Shelby County, Alabama.
8 Plaintiff purchased Annies Natural salad dressing at Walmart in April of 2017.
9 Being a health conscious consumer, she was drawn to the representation that the
10
dressing was a natural product. In her mind, she understood that there was no
11
synthetic ingredient in the salad dressing, since it was represented as natural. This
12
Complaint involves allegations of misrepresentation and other wrong-doings within
13
14 the State of California and across the United States by Defendant Annies
15 Homegrown, Inc. (Annies) and Defendant General Mills, Inc. (General Mills),
16 who both are sometimes jointly referred to collectively as Defendants.
17
2. Defendant Annies is, to the best knowledge and belief of Plaintiff, a
18
Delaware corporation with its principal office located in the State of California.
19
Annies, it is believed, operates as a wholly-owned subsidiary of General Mills,
20
21 which to the best knowledge and belief of Plaintiff, is a Delaware corporation with
22 its corporate headquarters and principal office located in the State of Minnesota.
23 Defendants manufacture, distribute and sell at retail to California consumers, and
24
across the United States, the products subject of this Complaint - Annies Natural
25
Products.
26
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
27
28 3. Subject matter jurisdiction over this civil action exists in this Court
-2-
1 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332. Furthermore, due to complete diversity of citizenship
2 of the parties and the amount in controversy being in excess of $5 million, exclusive
3
of interest, and costs, this Court is further granted subject matter jurisdiction.
4
4. This Court should also exercise jurisdiction over this case since less
5
than two-thirds of the putative class reside within the State of California.
6
7 5. Additionally, since (i) Defendants conduct substantial business within
8 the State of California such that Defendants have more than sufficient contacts
9 within the State of California, and (ii) Defendant Annies principal place of business
10
is in the State of California, this Court has personal jurisdiction over this case.
11
6. Venue is appropriate in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391 (a)
12
because Defendants (i) conduct a substantial business in this District and (ii) a
13
14 substantial part of the events giving rise to Plaintiffs claims took place within this
15 District.
16 III. CASE SUMMARY

17
7. This case arises out of Defendants deceptive, unfair, and false
18
practices regarding their marketing of their Annies Naturals salad dressings (the
19
Products).
20
21 8. On the label of the Products, Defendants intentionally and
22 conspicuously represent that the Products are Natural. The products further recite
23 on the front bottom: No artificial flavors, synthetic colors or synthetic
24 preservatives. The reasonable consumer would think, as did the Plaintiff, that the
25
Products are all Natural. The Products, however, are not all Natural because
26
they contain Xanthan Gum, a Synthetic Ingredient.
27
9. The United States Food and Drug Administration (hereinafter, the
28
-3-
1 FDA) does not object to the use of the term natural to describe a food product so
2 long as the product does not contain a synthetic substance.
3
10. Knowing that reasonable consumers like Plaintiff are increasingly
4
interested in purchasing healthy food products that do not contain potentially
5
harmful artificial, synthetic ingredients, Defendants have sought to take advantage
6
7 of this growing market by labeling certain products as Natural. By affixing such a
8 label to the packaging of the Products, Defendants expect to entice consumers like
9 Plaintiff to pay a premium for the Products.
10
11. The label of the Products is deceptive, unfair, false, and misleading in
11
that Defendants prominently represent that the Products are Natural. They are not.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-4-
1 12. The Products are not all Natural because they contain the Synthetic
2 Ingredient, Xanthan gum.
3
13. Xanthan Gum is a powerful synthetic thickener that is commercially
4
manufactured by fermenting bacteria with glucose, sucrose or lactose, which is then
5
sterilized with isopropyl alcohol before being dried and milled for use commercially
6
7 as a powder. 7 C.F.R. 205.605(b) unequivocally identifies Xanthan Gum as a
8 synthetic substance.
9 14. Neither Plaintiff nor any reasonable consumer would expect to find
10
synthetic ingredients in Products labeled Natural.
11
15. Furthermore, neither Plaintiff nor any reasonable consumer when
12
reviewing the label of the Products would know nor should know that Xanthan Gum
13
14 is not natural, even though Defendants include it on the reverse ingredients list of
15 the Products.
16 16. As a result of Defendants deceitful labels, Defendants are able to

17
charge Plaintiff and class members a premium for the Products. Because the
18
Products are not in fact wholly natural, the Products are actually worth less than
19
they are represented, and Plaintiff and class members have paid extra for them.
20
21 17. Defendants misrepresentation constitutes unfair and deceptive
22 practices, including but not limited to the use or employment of deception, fraud,
23 false pretense, false promise, and misrepresentation.
24
IV. CLASS ALLEGATIONS
25
18. Plaintiff brings this action on her own behalf and on behalf of a
26
proposed class of all other similarly situated persons (Class Members or the
27
28 Class) consisting of:
-5-
1
All citizens of the United States, its territories and Puerto
2 Rico who purchased Annies Natural products for
personal, household, or family purposes in the six years
3
preceding the filing of this Petition (the Class Period).
4
5 19. Excluded from the Class are: (a) federal, state and/or local
6 governments, including, but not limited to, their departments, agencies, divisions,
7 bureaus, boards, sections, groups, counsels, and/or subdivisions; (b) any entity in
8
which Defendants have a controlling interest, to include, but not limited to, their
9
legal representatives, heirs, and successors; (c) all persons who are presently in
10
bankruptcy proceedings or who obtained a bankruptcy discharge in the last three
11
12 years; and (d) any judicial officer in this lawsuit and/or persons within the third
13 degree of consanguinity to such officer.
14 20. Upon information and belief, the Class consists of thousands of

15
purchasers of the Products. Accordingly, it would be impracticable to join all Class
16
Members before the Court.
17
21. There are numerous and substantial questions of law or fact common to
18
19 all of the members of the Class and which predominate over any individual issues.
20 Included within the common questions of law or fact are:
21
a. whether the Natural claim on the Products labels is unfair, false,
22 misleading, and deceptive:
23 b. whether Defendants violated the law by selling the Products with false,
24 misleading, and deceptive representations;
25 c. whether Defendants intended that Plaintiff and the Class Members would
26
rely on its Natural representations;
27 d. whether Defendants acts constitute unfair, deceptive and fraudulent

28
business acts and practices or deceptive, untrue, and misleading
merchandising practices;
-6-
e. whether Defendants were unjustly enriched; and

1
2 f. the proper measure of damages sustained by Plaintiff and Class Members.
3 22. The claims of the Plaintiff are typical of the claims of Class Members,
4 in that she shares the above-referenced facts and legal claims or questions with
5
Class Members; there is a sufficient relationship between the damage to Plaintiff
6
and Defendants conduct affecting Class Members, and Plaintiff has no interests
7
adverse to the interests of other Class Members.
8
9 23. Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interests of Class
10 Members and have retained counsel experienced and competent in the prosecution
11 of complex class actions including complex questions that arise in consumer
12
protection litigation.
13
24. A class action is superior to other methods for the fair and efficient
14
adjudication of this controversy, since individual joinder of all Class Members is
15
16 impracticable and no other group method of adjudication of all claims asserted
17 herein is more efficient and manageable for at least the following reasons:
18
a. the claim presented in this case predominates over any questions of law or
19 fact, if any exists at all, affecting any individual member of the Class;
20 b. absent a Class, the Class Member will continue to suffer damage and
21 Defendants unlawful conduct will continue without remedy while
Defendant profits from and enjoys its ill-gotten gains;
22
c. given the size of individual Class Members claims, few, if any, Class
23
Members could afford to or would seek legal redress individually for the
24 wrongs that Defendant has committed against them, and absent Class
25
Members have no substantial interest in individually controlling the
prosecution of individual actions;
26
d. when the liability of Defendants has been adjudicated, claims of all Class
27 Members can be administered efficiently and/or determined uniformly by
28 the Court; and
-7-
1
e. this action presents no difficulty that would impede its management by the
2 court as a class action, which is the best available means by which Plaintiff
and members of the Class can seek redress for the harm caused to them by
3
Defendants.
4
5 25. Because Plaintiff seeks relief for the entire Class, the prosecution of
6 separate actions by individual members of the Class would create a risk of
7
inconsistent or varying adjudications with respect to individual members of the
8
Class, which would establish incompatible standards of conduct for Defendants.
9
26. Further, bringing individual claims would overburden the Courts and
10
11 be an inefficient method of resolving the dispute, which is the center of this
12 litigation. Adjudications with respect to individual members of the Class would, as
13 a practical matter, be dispositive of the interest of other members of the Class who
14
are not parties to the adjudication and may impair or impede their ability to protect
15
their interests. As a consequence, class treatment is a superior method for
16
adjudication of the issues in this case.
17
18 V. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION:

FOR VIOLATION OF BUS. & PROF. CODE 17200, ET SEQ.
19 AND SIMILAR LAWS OF OTHER STATES
20
27. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the
21
allegations of paragraphs 1 through 26, inclusive, above.
22
28. Beginning at an exact date unknown to Plaintiff, Defendants
23
24 committed acts of unfair competition, as defined by Bus. & Prof. Code 17200, and
25 similar laws of other states by engaging in the false advertising and promotion of the
26 products as Natural when in fact the products contained at least one synthetic
27
additive. The packaging on the product is deceptive as described hereinabove. A
28
-8-
1 true and correct copy of the Defendants promotion of the products as Natural. is
2 depicted in paragraph 11 above.
3
29. These acts and practices violate the UCL and similar laws of other
4
states in that:
5
(a) The above-described false advertising and promotion are likely to
6
7 mislead consumers and, consequently, constitute a fraudulent and deceptive
8 business act or practice within the meaning of the UCL and similar laws of
9 other states;
10
(b) The above-described false advertising and promotion are an unlawful
11
business practice under the UCL and similar laws of other states in that they
12
violate California Civil Code 1770(a)(5), and related legislation of other
13
14 states which bars [r]representing that goods or services have sponsorship,
15 approval, characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities which they

16 do not have; and
17
(c) The harm of the above-described false advertising and promotion to
18
Plaintiff and to the other consumers outweighs the utility of the practices by
19
Defendants and, consequently, constitutes an unfair business act or practice
20
21 within the meaning of the UCL and similar laws of other states.
22 (d) The fraudulent, unlawful and unfair business practices and false and
23 misleading advertising by Defendants, as described above, present a
24
continuing threat to consumers, in that they will continue to mislead
25
consumers to purchase the products based on false premises.
26
30. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned acts,
27
28 Defendants received and continue to hold money belonging to Plaintiff and other
-9-
1 consumers who were led to purchase the products by the unlawful acts of
2 Defendants.
3 VI. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION:

FOR VIOLATION OF BUS. & PROF. CODE 17500, ET SEQ.
4
AND SIMILAR LAWS OF OTHER STATES
5
6
7
32. Beginning at an exact date unknown to Plaintiff, Defendants committed
8
9 acts of untrue and misleading advertising as defined by Bus. & Prof. Code 17500,
10 and similar laws of other states, by engaging in the false advertising and promotion
11 of the products as natural when they contained a synthetic additive. The packaging
12
on the product is deceptive as described hereinabove.
13
33. The fraudulent, unlawful and unfair business practices and false and
14
misleading advertising by Defendants, as described above, present a continuing
15
16 threat to consumers, in that such will continue to mislead consumers to purchase the
17 products based on false premises.
18
VII. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION:
19 FOR NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION
20 34. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the
21
22
35. Defendants above-mentioned representations about Annies Natural
23
Products were untrue.
24
25 36. Defendants made the representations herein alleged with the intention
26 of inducing reasonable consumers, including Plaintiff, to purchase Defendants said
27 products by falsely causing them to believe that the subject products were wholly
28
- 10 -
1 natural and lacking synthetic additives.
2 37. Plaintiff and other consumers saw, believed, and relied on Defendants
3
advertising representations and, in reliance on them, purchased the products.
4
38. At the time Defendants made the misrepresentations herein alleged,
5
Defendants had no reasonable grounds for believing the representations to be true or
6
7 correct.
8 39. As a proximate result of Defendants negligent misrepresentations,

9 Plaintiff and other consumers were induced to spend an amount to be determined at
10
trial on Defendants products.
11
VIII. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
12 FOR INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION
13 40. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges, and incorporates herein by reference the
14
15
41. Beginning at an exact date unknown to Plaintiff, Defendants
16
represented to the public, including Plaintiff, by packaging and other means, that
17
18 Annies Natural Products were wholly natural with no synthetic additives. The
19 packaging and representations on and regarding the products are deceptive as
20 described hereinabove.
21
42. Defendants representations were untrue, in that Annies Natural
22
Products are not wholly natural but in actuality contain at least one synthetic
23
additive, as set forth in detail above.
24
25 43. At the time Defendants made the representations herein alleged,
26 Defendants knew the representations were false.
27 44. Defendants made the misrepresentations herein alleged with the

28
- 11 -
1 intention of depriving Plaintiff and the putative class of property or otherwise
2 causing injury, and are guilty of fraud.
3
45. As a proximate result of these acts, Plaintiff and other reasonable
4
consumers were induced to spend an amount on Defendants products in excess of
5
prices paid for similar products, not being so represented same to be determined at
6
7 trial.
8 46. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereby alleges that Defendants
9 knew that the aforementioned products did not provide the promoted health benefits
10
as being wholly natural and did in fact contain said synthetic ingredient(s). Plaintiff
11
and other consumers, in purchasing and using the products as herein alleged, did
12
rely on Defendants above representations, all to their damage as hereinabove
13
14 alleged. In doing the things aforementioned, Defendants were guilty of malice,
15 oppression, and fraud, and Plaintiff and the putative class are, therefore, entitled to
16 recover exemplary or punitive damages.
17 IX. FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

18 FOR BREACH OF EXPRESS WARRANTY
19
20
21
48. The promise and representation by Defendants that Annies Natural
22
23 Products contain no synthetic additives became part of the basis of the bargain
24 between the parties and this constituted an express warranty.
25 49. Thereby, Defendants sold the goods to Plaintiff and other consumers,
26
who bought the goods from Defendants, based on said warranty.
27
50. However, Defendants breached the express warranty, in that the goods
28
- 12 -
1 were in fact not as represented, as set forth in detail above. As a result of this
2 breach, Plaintiff and other consumers in fact did not receive the goods as warranted
3
by Defendants.
4
51. As a proximate result of this breach of warranty by Defendants,
5
Plaintiff and other consumers have been damaged in an amount to be determined at
6
7 trial.
8 X. SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

FOR BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY
9
10
11 allegations of paragraphs 1 through 51, inclusive, above.
12 53. Defendants are merchants with respect to goods of the kind which
13 were sold to Plaintiff and other consumers, and there was in the sale to Plaintiff and
14
other consumers an implied warranty that those goods were merchantable as
15
represented.
16
54. However, Defendants breached that warranty which was implied in the
17
18 contract for the sale of goods.
19 55. As a result thereof, Plaintiff and other consumers did not receive goods
20 as impliedly warranted by Defendants to be merchantable.
21
56. As a proximate result of this said breach of warranty by Defendants,
22
Plaintiff and other consumers have been damaged in an amount to be determined at
23
trial.
24
XI. SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
25
FOR BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF FITNESS OF PURPOSE
26

28
- 13 -
1 allegations of paragraphs 1 through 56, inclusive, above.
2 58. Plaintiff and other consumers sought a good source for nutritional
3
value of natural food products without a synthetic additive. Plaintiff relied on
4
Defendants skill and judgment to select and furnish suitable goods for that purpose.
5
Plaintiff and other consumers selected the more expensive Annies Natural
6
7 Products in reliance on Defendants representation that such was the state of the
8 products, which in fact was not true.
9 59. At the time of the sale, Defendants had reason to know the particular
10
purpose for which the goods were required, and that Plaintiff and other consumers
11
were relying on Defendants skill and judgment to select and furnish suitable goods
12
so that there was an implied warranty that the goods were fit for the purpose
13
14 intended.
15 60. However, Defendants breached the warranty implied at the time of

16 sale, in that Plaintiff and other consumers did not receive suitable goods, and the
17
goods were not fit for the particular purpose for which they were required in that the
18
goods were/are not as marketed by Defendants.
19
61. As a proximate result of this breach of warranty by Defendants,
20
21 Plaintiff and other consumers have been damaged in an amount to be determined at
22 trial.
23 XII. EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

24 FOR VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIAS CONSUMER LEGAL REMEDIES
ACT; CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE 1750 ET SEQ.
25
26 Notice Pursuant to Civil Code 1782.
27 Plaintiff hereby demands that within 30 days from service of this Complaint,
28 Defendant correct, repair, replace or otherwise rectify the deceptive practices
- 14 -
complained of herein for the entire Class pursuant to California Civil Code
1
1770. Failure to do so will result in Plaintiff amending this complaint to seek
2 damages for such deceptive practices pursuant to California Civil Code 1782.

4
5
63. Plaintiff, contends that Defendants have violated California Civil Code
6
1770(a)(5) by making false and exaggerated claims (as set forth in detail above)
7
8 concerning Products being wholly natural without synthetic ingredients. The
9 representation on the product is deceptive as described hereinabove. Specifically,
10 the products packaging falsely represents that Annies Natural Products possess
11
characteristics, uses and benefits they do not have.
12
64. As a proximate result of this violation by Defendants, Plaintiff and
13
other consumers have been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial.
14
15
16 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays for relief from Defendants for the
17 first and second causes of action as follows:
18
1. Pursuant to Bus. & Prof. Code 17203 and 17535, and similar laws of other
19
states and pursuant to the equitable powers of this Court, Plaintiff prays that
20
the Defendants be permanently enjoined from marketing the Products as
21
22 presently performed;
23 2. Pursuant to Bus. & Prof. Code 17203 and 17535, and similar laws of other
24 states and pursuant to the equitable powers of this Court, Plaintiff prays that
25
the Defendants be ordered to restore to Plaintiff and other consumers all
26
funds acquired by means of any act or practice declared by this Court to be
27
unlawful or fraudulent or to constitute unfair competition under Bus. & Prof.
28
- 15 -
1 Code 17200, et seq., and similar laws of other states or untrue or misleading
2 advertising under Bus. & Prof. Code 17500;
3
3. For attorneys fees and costs, and
4
4. For such other costs and further relief as the Court may deem proper.
5
7 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays for relief from Defendants for the
8 third and fourth causes of action as follows:
9 1. For general damages in an amount to be determined at trial;

10
2. For special damages in an amount to be determined at trial;
11
3. For punitive damages;
12
4. For attorneys fees and costs of suit herein incurred; and
13
14 5. For such other and further relief as the court may deem proper.
15
16 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief from Defendants for the fifth, sixth and
17
seventh causes of action as follows:
18
1. For damages in an amount to be determined at trial;
19
2. For costs of suit herein incurred, including attorneys fees, if appropriate; and
20
22
23 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief from Defendants for the eighth cause
24
of action as follows:
25
1. For damages in an amount to be determined at trial;
26
2. For costs of suit herein incurred, including attorneys fees, if appropriate;
27
28 3. That the Defendant be permanently enjoined from marketing the Products
- 16 -
1 being natural without synthetic additive(s); and

3
4
Jury Trial Demand
5
Plaintiff Janell Johnson Campbell hereby demands a trial by jury on all legal
6
7 claims.
8 Respectfully submitted this 28th day of August, 2017.

9
10 LAW OFFICE OF JOHN W. DAVIS
11
12 By: /s/ John W. Davis

John W. Davis
13
14 John W. Davis (CA Bar No. 200113)

501 W. Broadway, Suite 800
15 San Diego, CA 92101
16 Telephone: (619) 400-4870
Facsimile: (619) 342-7170
17 Email: john@johnwdavis.com
18
19
CHARLES M. THOMPSON, P.C.
20
21
By: /s/ Charles M. Thompson
22 Charles M. Thompson
23
24 Charles M. Thompson, (Applying for

Admission Pro Hac Vice)
25 1401 Doug Baker Blvd., Suite 107-135
26 Birmingham, AL 35242
Telephone (205) 995-0068
27 Facsimile: (866) 610-1650
28 Email: cmtlaw@aol.com
- 17 -

Complaint

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 3:17-cv-01736-MMA-MDD Document 1 Filed 08/28/17 PageID.

1 John W. Davis (CA Bar No. 200113)

11 Attorneys for Plaintiff

Complaint for Injunctive Relief and Damages

7 mentioned in this Complaint, was a resident of Hoover, Shelby County, Alabama.

8 Plaintiff purchased Annies Natural salad dressing at Walmart in April of 2017.

16 who both are sometimes jointly referred to collectively as Defendants.

23 Defendants manufacture, distribute and sell at retail to California consumers, and

1 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332. Furthermore, due to complete diversity of citizenship

7 5. Additionally, since (i) Defendants conduct substantial business within

16 III. CASE SUMMARY

21 8. On the label of the Products, Defendants intentionally and

23 on the front bottom: No artificial flavors, synthetic colors or synthetic

2 long as the product does not contain a synthetic substance.

7 of this growing market by labeling certain products as Natural. By affixing such a

9 Plaintiff to pay a premium for the Products.

7 as a powder. 7 C.F.R. 205.605(b) unequivocally identifies Xanthan Gum as a

16 16. As a result of Defendants deceitful labels, Defendants are able to

21 17. Defendants misrepresentation constitutes unfair and deceptive

23 false pretense, false promise, and misrepresentation.

28 Class) consisting of:

13 degree of consanguinity to such officer.

14 20. Upon information and belief, the Class consists of thousands of

20 Included within the common questions of law or fact are:

27 d. whether Defendants acts constitute unfair, deceptive and fraudulent

e. whether Defendants were unjustly enriched; and

2 f. the proper measure of damages sustained by Plaintiff and Class Members.

11 of complex class actions including complex questions that arise in consumer

16 impracticable and no other group method of adjudication of all claims asserted

11 be an inefficient method of resolving the dispute, which is the center of this

12 litigation. Adjudications with respect to individual members of the Class would, as

18 V. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION:

2 depicted in paragraph 11 above.

7 mislead consumers and, consequently, constitute a fraudulent and deceptive

14 states which bars [r]representing that goods or services have sponsorship,

15 approval, characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities which they

3 VI. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION:

17 products based on false premises.

1 natural and lacking synthetic additives.

8 39. As a proximate result of Defendants negligent misrepresentations,

19 packaging and representations on and regarding the products are deceptive as

25 43. At the time Defendants made the representations herein alleged,

26 Defendants knew the representations were false.

27 44. Defendants made the misrepresentations herein alleged with the

1 intention of depriving Plaintiff and the putative class of property or otherwise

2 causing injury, and are guilty of fraud.

14 alleged. In doing the things aforementioned, Defendants were guilty of malice,

16 recover exemplary or punitive damages.

17 IX. FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

24 between the parties and this constituted an express warranty.

8 X. SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

11 allegations of paragraphs 1 through 51, inclusive, above.

18 contract for the sale of goods.

27 57. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the

1 allegations of paragraphs 1 through 56, inclusive, above.

8 products, which in fact was not true.

15 60. However, Defendants breached the warranty implied at the time of

21 Plaintiff and other consumers have been damaged in an amount to be determined at

23 XII. EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

26 Notice Pursuant to Civil Code 1782.

28 Defendant correct, repair, replace or otherwise rectify the deceptive practices

3 62. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the

8 concerning Products being wholly natural without synthetic ingredients. The

9 representation on the product is deceptive as described hereinabove. Specifically,